HoTPP Benchmark: Are We Good at the Long Horizon Events Forecasting?

ICLR 2025 Conference Submission6989 Authors

26 Sept 2024 (modified: 26 Nov 2024)ICLR 2025 Conference SubmissionEveryoneRevisionsBibTeXCC BY 4.0
Keywords: Event Sequences, Marked Temporal Point Processes, Long Horizon Forecasting, Evaluation Metric, Benchmark
TL;DR: A novel metric and benchmark for evaluating long-horizon event sequence forecasting.
Abstract: Accurately forecasting multiple future events within a given time horizon is crucial for applications in finance, retail, social networks, and healthcare. Event timing and labels are typically modeled using Marked Temporal Point Processes (MTPP), with evaluations often focused on next-event prediction quality. While some studies have extended evaluations to a fixed number of future events, we demonstrate that this approach leads to inaccuracies in handling false positives and false negatives. To address these issues, we propose a novel evaluation method inspired by object detection techniques from computer vision. Specifically, we introduce Temporal mean Average Precision (T-mAP), a temporal variant of mAP, which overcomes the limitations of existing long-horizon evaluation metrics. Our extensive experiments demonstrate that models with strong next-event prediction accuracy can yield poor long-horizon forecasts, and vice versa, indicating that specialized methods are needed for each task. To support further research, we release HoTPP, the first benchmark specifically designed for evaluating long-horizon MTPP predictions. HoTPP includes large-scale datasets with up to 43 million events and provides optimized procedures for both autoregressive and parallel inference, paving the way for future advancements in the field.
Supplementary Material: zip
Primary Area: datasets and benchmarks
Code Of Ethics: I acknowledge that I and all co-authors of this work have read and commit to adhering to the ICLR Code of Ethics.
Submission Guidelines: I certify that this submission complies with the submission instructions as described on https://iclr.cc/Conferences/2025/AuthorGuide.
Reciprocal Reviewing: I understand the reciprocal reviewing requirement as described on https://iclr.cc/Conferences/2025/CallForPapers. If none of the authors are registered as a reviewer, it may result in a desk rejection at the discretion of the program chairs. To request an exception, please complete this form at https://forms.gle/Huojr6VjkFxiQsUp6.
Anonymous Url: I certify that there is no URL (e.g., github page) that could be used to find authors’ identity.
No Acknowledgement Section: I certify that there is no acknowledgement section in this submission for double blind review.
Submission Number: 6989
Loading